In my opinion, the reason it is tanking so hard is too much apathy about immediate (in some cases 'small') problems and not enough fanaticism driven toward continuous improvement. Big initiatives with many months or even years of time horizon take precedence over immediate issues, coupled with a poor track record (which just got poorer) of actually delivering on these bold ambitions.
To make an analogy, imagine you have a small restaurant, and you are planning a big relocation and expansion in 1-2 years. Does that mean that you stop mopping the floors, changing dead light bulbs, fixing broken windows, ensuring that food is prepared well and comes from quality vendors, employees are providing excellent service? No, because if you do that, by the time you get to your big expansion, you won't have any customers (in the case of Steem, users and investors). What you want to do is passionately maintain and improve your existing restaurant so that by the time the expansion is ready, you have a long line of customers out the door every day who can't fit in your smaller restaurant who can't wait to fill the bigger one.
Now what happens if you don't clean the floors, pick up trash, don't change the dead light bulbs, fix broken windows, the employees give crappy service, and the food is garbage? You will have no customers and potentially run out of money long before you even get to your planned expansion opening. Or if not, then you may instead fail when your expansion opens and it is empty. Any of this sound familiar?
Success in competitive markets goes to those who channel extreme fanaticism into effective execution (which means being able to both plan a 'major expansion' and fanatically deliver continuous excellence and continuous improvement on what you already have). That includes a lot of 'boring' details and hard work (and often, long hours), and effectively multitasking between the small maintenance tasks and working on the bold exciting future.
In all honesty I don't know if it is possible for Steem's (and Steemit's) development process to operate in this manner. It is radically different from the existing culture, and that sort of change doesn't seem easy, even in a time of crisis. I hope I'm wrong.
For too long most of us were unaware of the issues present with Steemit.inc operations. Not many people have access to Neds Telegram chat room or his email address, phone number... Up until now, it was all guesswork as to what was happening. But now the issues are clearer.
The main failure i see here is actually something Ned did say on the livestream. But he said it in such a way that he used that failure as almost a positive attribute of himself and his team..
They spread themselves thin in every regard, like butter over a football field sized slice of bread.
Thats what i mean when i say mismanagement. Ned can say that they are hardworking and "do a lot of stuff" but its on the CEO to allocate resources in a effective and sustainable way. That clearly hasnt been done.
You just cant spread your resources on so many different things in a volatile market like this. Its an enormous burden and something will give eventually.
You would have done it better, right? ;)
Haha. Nice one.
Nah. I dont have the ego to make that claim. ;)
And the large stakeholders who had/have the most to lose watched all this happen and did not try to take out the garbage or reward the good servers and the hosts.
They staked and burnt coins and continue to ignore those who were and are trying to build engagement, hold stake, and attempt to do the cleaning.
We all played a role in where we are today, it seems that talking about went wrong is still a greater priority than fixing it.
This i think is a good point Smooth made though its made in another context then what i will say.. Imo, there has been too much focus on talking about engagement and rewarding quality creators/contributors (even if that hasnt been realized to a great degree) in comparison to the focus we have on external presence of steem in the crypto ecosystem.
Everything else equal, a nation with 2 million people is twice as rich as the nation with 1 million.
We have the tools we need but we lack any kind of leadership. It doesnt need to be a single guy, it can be many but those many act like kindergarten teachers.
I really hoped that community leaders would learn a lesson from the Netcoins, "call to action" hype.. What clearer example at what can be done do you need?
But no, ship is taking in water and they are playing kindergarten games.
I dont have to power to do anything and after this, even if i tried id be shot down, but maybe this post rattles some feathers and those "leaders" start moving their butts.
You are not alone thinking like that. I've met many people sharing your way of seeing things. I haven't lost hope, perhaps you'll hang on tight too and at some point we'll come up with a solution.
Oh if Steem goes down im going down with the ship. No doubt about it. 50 feet under water ill be holding my breath and waving my bucket around as if im throwing out the water.
Still. Id rather it not come to that. 😉
There is only one 'large' stakeholder that matters here.
People with 1/2%-3% are not really large stakeholders and they certainly have little say in how development happens (believe me, we have tried).
Your points about rewarding engagement and such are focusing on the social layer which can help things to some extent but has desperately needed improvements for years but has been ignored in favor of long term initiatives that have largely been a bust and probably a huge waste of money (though I'm not privy to the spending records).
There is no substitute for effective development when you start with a system that was barely a proof of concept at launch. The first several months saw a good deal of continuous improvement but after that things went badly awry.
Okay, your points are valid. I just can't see continuing to depend on what has proven to be undependable.
When there is still only one large stakeholder there isn't a choice. Other than a community fork to redistribute stake, and that's a big can of worms.
Like it or not when you hitched your wagon to Steem, you hitched it to Steemit too. Let's hope they can get their shit together, because such hope or just writing it off as a loss are the plausible alternatives at this point. My comments are meant as constructive tough love. I think they are that too.
You've always been blunt and honest and hence someone who's opinion I value.
Which is why I am disappointed to hear you say this, because you are likely right.
Being blunt and honest doesn't necessarily make me correct. I could be completely wrong, though I don't think so.
I've been somewhat of a skeptic but have also kept an open mind on things and sometimes defended Steemit Inc against what I saw as unfair or incorrect criticisms. However, after enough experience, one can start to reach some stronger conclusions and this case they are not favorable ones. I do hope that they make some big changes. If not then the time will likely come when those who, despite further failures and disappointment, continue to support Steem as a blockchain (of which I may or may not be one) will need to consider a strategy for a post-Steemit Steem.
Stronger conclusions based on experiencing further failures and disappointment. I can relate with those words. I tried to envision a post-steemit-steem blockchain. It's non-existent.
Constructive tough love, when directed at the insecure and those with a fragile ego, is only ever seen as personal attacks....unfortunately..
That's a high-value answer, @smooth!
Steemit Inc. should have given responsibilities towards the community instead of doing everything on their own, but they know it already, so no point in hitting the same nail.
Responsibilities align with funding and ownership. Steem was for better or worse launched on a largely centralized economic model with Steemit (both the company entity and its team/founders) starting out by assigning themselves 80% of the stake (they have less now, but still a huge percentage).
Even what we refer to as 'whales' are comparatively tiny, generally 1/2-3%, most at the lower end of the range. This is both a funding and a governance issue. Since Steemit and its founders never locked their stake into a non-voting account (as was once considered, and a feature even implemented, by them, in a hardfork to enable it), everyone operates under the assumption that Steemit and its team can unilaterally override outside stakeholder/witness voting at any time. As a result, no one feels safe or justified in investing resources in anything other than letting Steemit set the priorities and following along.
Anyway, yes, I agree on literally devolving responsibilities, but it isn't quite as simple as just telling other people to do it without also considering funding and governance.
Thats true.
But i think we need too some Sharesholder Forum / Slack / whatever. Because i think holding Steem is more like a Stockshare not like other cryptos more like a currency.
So it would be nice to get good Information about future plans / projects etc. This Infos doesnt need come from Steemit. Like Steemfest but online.
So we can support some projects etc.
maybe it is good the price go this low. So Steemit need to sell more and loss the overvoting Power.
there's a telegram group, Steem dApp Foundation, you might want to inquire about
Ah ok, thank you
a telegram group is really good. You know where i can find?
Contact me on Discord, same name
Insightful
That's pretty much the only reason I read from people complaining about Steem on reddit & co.
Maybe it's time now that the rest stake or part of it is actually locked behind the mechanism? Or maybe it doesn't make any difference anymore?
It makes a difference to the governance issue if it is made non-voting. And it may make a difference to the market price if it is locked from selling faster than a given controlled schedule. XRP increased dramatically in price when the Ripple company did the latter, but prices are always unpredictable so we can't say with any certainty that STEEM would do the same.
I understand, but do you think it would make people rethink, who have a bad memory about Steem due to the pre-mine?
It did with Ripple. Of course there are still many Ripple critics (as with every blockchain) but from an investment appeal and price perspective it certainly seemed to have made a big difference.
ripple did it very successfully, I would love to see steemit inc consider such move.
Preach. You need:
a great working product
Marketing
and sales
...if you are not good a developing those things, you hire people to do it. I keep hearing "we" from people who are not Steemit Inc. ...which confuses me. As a business owner, my customers are not "Mel Booker Music" I actually exist to serve them.
...Such an old fashioned way to look at things....
lolol
@lucylin Yep :-) I do Love my customers.
Salespeople are needed.... resteem!
https://steemit.com/blog/@lucylin/here-s-a-thought-some-positive-action-is-needed-on-steemit